Pages

Saturday, 28 February 2009

In a small article in Thusdays Daily Mail at the bottom of page 7 the following was reported:-

Fresh questons are being asked yesterday as to whether the BBC's reporter Robert Preston is being used as a Government stooge.On Wednesday's 10 O'Clock News, the corporation's business editor excitedly reported that Sir Fred Goodwin was drawing a pension of £650,000 a year.The announcement completely overshadowed news yesterday that the RBS had made a record £24 billion loss and that the taxpayer would have to Insure the bank against future losses of up to £325 billion. The BBC has already defended Peston against claims that he was 'acting as a instrumnet of the Treasury' over the HBOS and Lloyds deal.Given the BBC's previous form in the matter of bias I smell a rat and believe the BBC and New Labour are far too close for comfort.

The BBC News at Ten were at it again on Tuesday night the 25th Feb. On an item on climate change they as usual were talking as if there is ONLY ONE science on this subject and that it is an absolute certainty. However in their duty of impartiality they should at least acknowledge that it is far from a proven science and many top scientists don't believe it is happening.

Monday, 23 February 2009

The BBC continues its bias reporting of the credit crunch always supporting the Government's line that this is a worldwide problem and that Gordon Brown is no more to blame than anyone else. Never pointing out or accusing New Labour Ministers of being totally to blame for allowing this to happen in the first place. Proof if proof were needed came to me this week in a summary article in the lastest edition of the 'The Week'. The article by Fareed Zakaria for Newsweek explains how Canada is not only surviving the credit crunch but positively thriving in it. Canada is alone amongst industrial nations in that it has not had one bank collapse. Last year the World Economic Forum ranked the country's banking system the healthiest in the world America's came 40th and the UK's 44th. Why has Canada been so stable well because while the USA and Europe loosened regulations on thier financial sectors the Canadians insisted on keeping old fashioned rules. - simple really just use some common sense.I wonder why the BBC doesn't report this very newsworthy story? Simple because the BBC is institutionally biased and as part of this country's elite the BBC would not want to upset the establishment and their cosy relationship with New Labour.

Sunday, 22 February 2009

Christopher Booker in the Sunday Telegraph today points out that the BBC once again have shown their bias on this subject.First they reported last week that a leading climate scientist in America Professor Chris Field warned that " the severity of Global warming will be much worse than previously believed" yet it turns out Professor Field is not even a climate scientist but an evolutionary biologist and a video the BBC promoted was pulled when it became clear it actually showed temperatures falling not rising!!!!Second the whole debate over the Artic ice cover turns out to have been based on a faulty satellite which was giving false information but the BBC still pushes as fact that the Artic ice is reducing.

The BBC just don't live in the real world but in a parallel universe full of politically correct socially liberal elites.

Wednesday, 18 February 2009

I had forgotten until BBC Radio Oxford phoned me this morning that on February 17 1976 “One Man and His Dog” was broadcast for the very first time. It made Phil Drabble a household name – he was a bit over-dressed – and I was never convinced that he actually liked Border Collies – but he was great, the programme was great and it developed a huge following.

When I was asked to follow on from Phil on his retirement I was honoured. I didn’t even know that a new presenter was wanted, but by a stroke of luck Phil Drabble was making a series on conservation for the BBC and they came to my small farm, with my good friend Gordon Beningfield, the sadly departed countryside artist, to film a small segment for the programmes. For some reason the producer liked what I did for the programme and suggested I put my name forward to replace Phil:” you are a natural”, he said.

I was short-listed, screen tested and I got the job against some top-line experienced presenters. I loved it. I felt it was an honour – a true country programme with real people in some of the most beautiful parts of the country.

But oh dear, who was in charge of programming? A grey man with a ten o’clock shadow; someone called Mark Thompson. Sadly the man who now pays Jonathon Ross £16,000 a day didn’t like sheep dog trialling so he switched the programme to 3.00 on a Saturday afternoon to reduce viewing figures. It worked, even I didn’t watch it on a Saturday afternoon and viewing figures plummeted to the same number as Countryfile, so One Man and His Dog was axed (but Countryfile stayed on – very odd).

Fortunately I organised a protest and personally delivered thousands of letters to the Television Centre demanding the programme’s return. That in itself is interesting. The BBC received thousands of letters saying sack Jonathan Ross and they kept him – the BBC received thousands of letters saying keep me and One Man and His Dog, so they sacked me and dumbed the programme down to a pathetic parody of itself

The powers that be were appalled that I, a Vocal Yokel, had managed to drum up so much support – and all that without a degree – how shocking. But they got their revenge. It had been noted that I had stood for Parliament for the Referendum Party (saving my deposit) and took part in the various Countryside Rallies and Marches – consequently I was sacked for “my attitude” towards the dumbed down programme – which was rubbish – and more sinisterly – “your other activities”. “My other activities” – what have they got to do with presenting a sheep dog programme?

As far as the BBC is concerned I have been virtually persona non grata ever since – the highlight - being invited onto “Question Time” – the invitation being suddenly withdrawn two days before the programme, with no valid explanation – and it was never re-issued. Is that a record?

Interestingly David Bellamy also stood for the Referendum Party and took part in the Countryside Marches – he vanished from the BBC at the same time – there’s integrity and even handed public service broadcasting for you. Never mind – I suppose David Bellamy’s departure made room for that wonderful bunny and grey squirrel hugger Bill Oddie – urban, Oxbridge and Vice-President of the League Against Cruel Sports. Obviously my “other activities” were the wrong ones.

The good thing about the One Man and His Dog dramas is the fact that the BBC crew – who I got on extremely well with, presented me with a wonderful hand carved crook – which is still one of my most treasured possessions.

All was not lost because there is an even better programme than “One Man and His Dog” – it is called “Come Bye” – proper sheepdog trialling on Horse and Country Television (Sky Channel 280). Despite financial hiccups – we hope that last year’s World Championships will be on before too long.

That was a remarkable event, with 50,000 spectators and twenty-two competing countries.

The most astonishing aspect of the competition of course was the fact that although it was a World Championship held in Britain, it was totally ignored by the BBC.

I am afraid from all my experiences of the BBC from Question Time, Countryfile, One Man and His Dog, The One Show etc I can only conclude that the BBC is institutionally uninterested in the real countryside, the people who live and work in it, and the problems and the discrimination that they face day by day. All this of course breaks the BBC’s own Charter and the codes of conduct derived from it – and whose in charge? Yes, Mark Thompson – him again.

Monday, 16 February 2009

Peter Oborne in the Daily Mail on Saturday accuses Ms Smith of thievery and challenges her to sue him. He says she got away with her expenses fiddle of claiming her second home allowance for her constituency home for 4 reasons.

1. The Commons Dept for Finance and Administration is notorious for allowing MPs to fiddle their expenses.

2. The wholehearted complicity of the Conservatives and LibDems as they are just as bad.

3. The refusal by the Parliamentry Commissioner John Lyon to investigate the case.

4. The BBC's very partial and highly unprofessional coverage of the story.

He goes on to say on this last point:-

"Rather than give a careful and unbiased account, its gullible political reporters immediately took the official government line.

For example a report on Radio 4's Today programme by Andy Hosken - before the official ruling - claimed that Ms Smith had not broken any rules and was, therefore in the clear.

While it was extraordinary for the BBC to prejudge the case at such an early stage, it was even more surprising that Hoskens had failed to understand the parliamentary rules on MPs' expenses. He wrongly referred to expenses being submitted to the Fees Office, an organisation which changed its name.

Other mistakes were even more grievous. the BBC man told listeners that MPs had an 'absolute discretion' to decide which was their main residence and which was their second home.

However the official rules do NOT allow absolute discretion, or anything remotely resembling it, and assert that in most cases the decision will be a 'matter of fact'.

Indeed, as the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards stated late last year in a crucial ruling: ' If a Member has his or her family living permanently in their constituency home and has modest accomodation in London big enough only for themselves, and which they use only when Parliamnet is in session, then it would clearly seem to be a matter of fact that theMember's main home is in the constituency.'

Monday, 9 February 2009

BBC faces fresh criticism over offensive remarks about Baroness ThatcherThe BBC is facing fresh criticism after two comedians made offensive remarks about Baroness Thatcher on a prime time quiz show.

By Laura Roberts and Richard Edwards
In The Telegraph

09 Feb 2009

Senior Tory figures have condemned the broadcast.

In Friday night's episode of QI, Jo Brand, who was caught up in the Carol Thatcher "golliwog" controversy, and Phil Jupitus both made comments which have led to complaints being lodged and further anger from viewers.

When a picture of the former prime minister was shown with her eyes and mouth deliberately altered, Jupitus pointed at it and shouted: "Burn the witch!"

Brand had earlier made a joke comparing Lady Thatcher with an Epilady hair remover.
She said: "It was great, actually, when she became Lady Thatcher, because then she sounded like a device for removing pubic hair".

The BBC said on Sunday it was too early to say how many complaints have been received about the show, which was broadcast at 9pm on BBC One. A spokesman added that it was filmed in June last year and "bears no relation to current events".

But senior Tory figures condemned the broadcast and some viewers said they were "astounded" and "disgusted" by the remarks.

Lord Tebbit told The Daily Telegraph: "It is another depressing episode. Lady Thatcher has been treated like this by the BBC for the past 30 years. It's no good asking them for an apology. It's like trying to stop a dog from barking.

"If we have a Conservative government then we can do something about it. The BBC is another part of the destruction of Great Britain.

"The truth is that the BBC doesn't know that it is biased. It thinks that Guardian reading champagne socialists are the norm."

In online forums, several people said that they had lodged formal complaints.

On the My Telegraph website, a member called Roger, in Winchester, wrote: "I was disgusted to hear Jo Brand's remarks about Margaret Thatcher ... which both Stephen Fry and the rest of the participants seemed to find highly amusing.

"This is typical of the sort of arrogance we have come to expect from foul-mouthed, left leaning "comedians" and the double standards to which they adhere.

"It also illustrates to double standards being applied by the BBC who, at the very least, should sack Brand and issue an apology. I have formally complained to the BBC."

A comment on another forum said: "This is such double standards by the BBC. Is it OK to ridicule and be nasty about Mrs Thatcher on national TV, but not OK for someone to say something in private? Jo Brand obviously has a real issue with the Thatchers."

Another viewer added: "Ms Brand's comments about Lady Thatcher were astounding. Does she really think that it is perfectly fine to talk about Thatcher, an elderly, largely defenceless and somewhat unwell lady, in that particularly disgusting manner? Doubtless she would speak of her own mother that way.

"Has the BBC any understanding at all of the public's disgust? Ms Brand should never be employed again by the BBC. Why should the license fee payer be obliged to fund her?"
Brand stormed out after Carol Thatcher likened a black tennis player to a "golliwog" during a private conversation in a green room at the BBC.

The corporation has received 3,300 complaints about its decision to sack Thatcher, with 60 calls and emails in favour of its action.

She is understood to be considering suing the BBC over her dismissal from The One Show.
The BBC was further embroiled in controversy on Friday when Jeremy Clarkson referred to Gordon Brown as a "one-eyed Scottish idiot" during a radio interview in Australia.

Clarkson was forced to apologise, via the BBC, after being condemned by MPs and disability charities for the remark.

Friday, 6 February 2009

Stephen Glover in the Daily Mail yesterday Thursday 5th Feb wrote under the heading :-

"The BBC is now run by a narrow sect, blind to the good sense and values of those it serves."

He criticises the decision over Carol Thatcher saying nobody in the real world really cares and yet she looses her job and Jonathan Ross keeps his for a far worse incident which did cause a public outrage. He says towards the end:-

"I am not in favour of racism or sexism either. Nor are most people. But when a once great public organisation is so denuded of belief and idealism, when it bears down with the blind obsession of a witchfinder general on small solecisms while disregarding gross aberrations of taste, iti s time to question its remit."
It is increasing clear that Mark Thompson, incidently a man of principle and conviction, can no longer control the BBC.

In my opinion the BBC is moving towards a confrontation with the public who increasing see the BBC as completely out of touch with their own aspirations and beliefs.

Thursday, 5 February 2009

The BBC is out of touch with large swathes of the public and is guity of self-censoring subjects that the corporation finds unpalatable, an official report has claimed.

As part of the report's research the BBC's own controller of editorial policy admitted that people felt that the corporation was guilty of a "bias of omission" by not covering their views.

Authors of the report called on the corporation to be more "open-minded" in the views it reflects and warned against "bias of elimination" which it branded "offensive".

The report noted that the BBC had "come late" to several important stories in recent years, including Euroscepticism and immigration , which as it happens, were "off limits" in terms of a liberal-minded comfort zone".

Research for the 80-page report showed that viewers were "frustrated" by political correctness at the BBC and feel the corporation is dominated by a London-centric bias, reflected in its programmes, presenters and coverage.

The report, which was commissioned by the BBC and written by independent programme-maker John Bridcut, also warned that if the BBC's viewers did not feel that the corporation was reflecting their lives and attitudes people would lose faith in it.

Their review hit out at programme-makers for misjudging where "cultural mainstream" opinion stood and for wanting to "swim" against popular opinion.

Staff were told to avoid imposing their own liberal assumptions on the audience and told to "embrace a broader range of opinion".

In the report, a news and current affairs producer recalled an instance where he had proposed a Newsnight investigation into the subject of "abortion on demand" but had been accused of being "anti-abortion" for even suggesting the idea which was not pursued.

Roger Mosey, former head of television news at the BBC, now head of sport, is also quoted as saying the corporation displays "fairly overt support" for multiculturalism.
Scroll down for more...

He also admitting having some sympathy with claims of a "liberal/pinko" agenda at times.
He recalled a news item about ethnic communities becoming the majority in parts of east London, where a reporter had told him that they had "worked really hard" to find a white resident who was happy with the situation.

Research in the review also found that even ethnic minorities felt that political correctness had gone to far and others said it was diluting comedy and entertainment at the broadcaster and complained of a "restrictive mind-set".

Authors of the report called for a "periodic reality check" on shows like The Archers and Casualty as well as news programmes.

The Archers has at times come under fire for losing its rural culture with increasingly metropolitan storylines.

It suggested that the broadcaster had been late in picking up on "pavement politics" such as concern over the loss of weekly rubbish collections and had been "caught on the hop" by the success of UKIP in the 2004 elections.

It warned of the dangers of an "institutional bias" in favour of stories generated by parliament rather than stories with populist roots.

The report also urged the BBC not to "close down the debate" on climate change, despite the corporation admitting that it no longer felt it necessary to justify equal space being given to opponents of the consensus on the issue.

The broadcaster's Oscar's coverage also came in for criticism over the presenters who were "transfixed by the glitz" in an "impartiality free zone' and called on the BBC to clamp down on its journalists becoming "opinion merchants ".

It also faced claims of political correctness over Muslim terrorist suspects who were arrested last summer. One member of the public surveyed for the report claimed: "I think the BBC is too politically correct. The BBC were saying '21 men have been arrested' and I thought 'what's happening?' So I flicked over to Sky and it says '21 Asian men have been arrested." The report claims that the BBC's editorial advisory department and its recently formed College of Journalism need an extended role so that impartiality is addressed much earlier in the production process.

It claims that impartiality should remain the "hallmark" of the BBC and said the balanced natureof its reporting was an "essential part" of the BBC's contract with its audience.
The report singled out hit sitcom The Vicar Of Dibley and a season of programmes on Africa.
An episode of The Vicar Of Dibley featured Dawn French promoting the Make Poverty History campaign.

"The implication was that the cause was universal and uncontroversial, whereas the Make Poverty History website made clear that it had contentious political goals," the report said.
Nowhere in the episode was it pointed out that the writer Richard Curtis was himself spearheading the campaign.

The report also quoted a senior BBC executive as saying that impartiality in the Africa season was "as safe as a blood bank in the hands of Dracula".

The report makes a series of 12 recommendations, or "guiding principles", which have been approved and adopted by the corporation.

That the One Show should be involved in all this nonsense is totally unsurprising. Last year I was invited onto it to talk about grey squirrels – yes I want them severely controlled. Oddly, the pro-squirrel guest was the urban Anika Rice. The famous “Green Room” was full of luvvies being luvvies – telling each other what they had done, where they had been and how absolutely luvvy they all were. I read a book.

Earlier in the day a researcher had asked me what I would do to control grey squirrels – “eat them”, I replied. I have eaten them casseroled, as a burger and as squirrel pate.“Will you get us a squirrel to eat on the programme?” they asked. In next to no time a gamekeeper friend had three squirrels dressed and jointed, ready for the oven.

Then came the politically correct message; “Oh it has been decided that you can’t eat squirrel on the show, it is wrong to kill animals for entertainment”.

So the One Show had caused three squirrels to be killed for no reason at all. The odd thing about this of course is the fact that the BBC is almost Cookery Programmed out with Ready Steady Cook etc – all using meat as part of their “entertainment”.

Perhaps BBC executives don’t realise that beef, lamb and pork are just as much “animal” as squirrels.

After the programmes, the main presenter, the rather characterless, bland, Adrian Chiles said:” You won’t write about this will you Robin?” Why not? What a shower – and was it you Adrian who behaved so despicably against Carol Thatcher – were you the INFORMER?

The one good thing about the programme was that Anneka Rice appeared to know nothing about squirrels, and the next day “Save Our Squirrels” the organisation fighting for red squirrels asked me to be their Patron. That of course will teach the BBC absolutely nothing.

So Dave, come on – for goodness sake organise a BBC licence boycott – if enough people did it the Government would have to take action against the Bigots Broadcasting Corporation. If Dastardly Dave is too much of a wimp – how about the Mail leading the way?

To view the original of this pre BBC Bias Article telling what goes on behind the scenes and showing just cow dishonest The BBC actually is CLICK HERE

Come on Dave – so far during my time of political re-think, you have shown that you couldn’t actually lead a sugar mouse out of a paper bag – now show some leadership – stop being a political pc-wimp and lead a licence-payers’ strike against the BBC.

What is going on? Carol Thatcher has had a private conversation with contributors to the BBC’s increasingly dreary and predictable “One Show”. Her conversation has been entirely legal, yet an informer has complained to the BBC’s thought-police and she has been sacked from the programme. Incredible – Jonathan Ross’s obscene phone call actually broke the law – he gets suspended; Carol Thatcher had a legal, private conversation – she is fired. Just as in Eastern Europe before the wall came down, or in the Third Reich, an “informer” has reported her for incorrect behaviour (1984) and she has been punished.

What a state to be in. Britain is gradually filling with informers, Quislings, collaborators and vigilantes, as New Labour turns into New Fascism. In the new order of things left has become right and right has become confused. To help show how politics has been hijacked by the devious and dangerous – remember Henry Williamson, author of that wonderful book “Tarka the Otter”. Despite his books he never received an honour – why? He believed in a united Europe – just like today’s EU and for his trouble he was called “right wing” and “a fascist”.
Now bizarrely, and I cannot work out how it has happened, those of us who are AGAINST the EU superstate are referred to as “right wing”. Sixty years ago we would have been left wing and acceptable. Today we are apparently right wing and unacceptable. Can somebody explain please as I am clearly rather dim?

So Carol Thatcher’s crime is that she suggested that a French tennis player with ringlets looked like a golliwog. Well, the fact is that I don’t know his name, but I think I know who she means simply because he does looks like a golliwog. When I was a child I had a golliwog; today I have a golliwog mug and when I went to America a couple of years ago I bought a collection of Little Black Sambo stories, sold to me by a black shop-assistant. When I told her how pleased I was to find the book and that in England it would be difficult to buy, she said:” How ridiculous, the stories and illustrations are wonderful – they should offend no-one – they are beautiful”. Never mind, most of the pc-whites at the BBC would presumably not regard her, as proper black – white BBC executives are the true defenders of black people from racism.

But who informed on Carol Thatcher – that is the big question. They should either be sacked or sent to Malawi for a month for a bit of education. Last time I went there I flew to Lilongwe from Harare on Air Where Are We, sorry, Air Malawi, and that was after a flight on Zambia Scareways – sorry again, Zambia Airways. Oh dear, and once in my hotel I received my first shock – the local paper had an obituary for a “Mr.Sambo – a true born nigger”.

When I first went to Malawi it was run by a “wicked dictator”, Dr Hastings Banda. The airport was efficient and the planes ran on time; the new capital showed vision with large plots of fast growing eucalyptus planted throughout the city for wood and charcoal; the roads were repaired and the streetlights worked. Outside the land was tended and for the first time for decades Malawi could feed itself. But oh, woe, pc Britain in the form of Tory Lynda Chalker, Baroness Wallasey, decided that Malawi was undemocratic.

It was almost as undemocratic as the system that had made Lynda Chalker a Baroness. In 1992 Lynda Chalker was democratically thrown out of the House of Commons. She was then undemocratically made Baroness Chalker, and although the electorate had rejected her, she continued in Government. From there, as Minister of State for Overseas Development, she had the audacity to lecture Malawi about “democracy”.

Well, Malawi is a democracy now and it is also a shambles. Corruption is rife, the country no longer feeds itself – the country no longer works – so that is what Lynda Chalker evidently regards as the fruits of democracy.

Go, “One Show” informer and actually learn something in Africa and I would almost bet my bottom dollar that you will be able to buy a golliwog in Blantyre.

To view Robin Page's original Blog of this item on The Mail online at CLICK HERE

Tuesday, 3 February 2009

I read a very good article in the latest Spectator by Rod Liddle about the BBC and the Gaza charity ad. In it he argues that the BBC was absolutely right NOT to broadcast the ad as it was clearly biased in favour of the Palestinians with every attempt made to serve there cause. He went on to congratulate the BBC for their balanced reporting of the recent war and therefore concluded for the BBC to have shown the ad would have broken their even handedness.

On reflection I agree with Rod Liddle because it is so important that the BBC honours its Royal Charter and is balanced especially with its worldwide reputation at sake.

HOWEVER I find the hypocrisy of the BBC completely beyond comprehension because ,as explained in post #War002, the BBC is institutionally bias in virtually everything else they broadcast - following in the main the liberal left, politically correct, human rights and multicultural agenda.

Sunday, 1 February 2009

Christopher Booker in The Sunday Telegraph today, as he has so often in the past (as in this article CLICK HERE), exposes the BBC for its institutional bias over climate change. So the stunt on the Thames recently with floating iceberg and polar bear was staged by a television company that is part owned by the BBC. Further more Newsnight edited Obama's inaugural speech to make his comments on global warming seem stronger.

As he says " again and again the BBC has been eager to promote every new scare raised by the advocates of man-made global warming."

The BBC is biased on climate change in defiance of its Royal Charter to be impartial.

This bias is further exposed by Dr. Richard North on his excellently researched blog at EUreferendum - to view his latest article on the subject CLICK HERE

Again & again the BBC is in breech of its ROYAL CHARTER, displaying undeniable bias on many issues.

Followers

About Me

To Contact me please eMail me giving your name and a land line phone number with the best times for me to phone you if needed.
My 'e'Mail address is:
Niall@Warry.Go-Plus.net
I will try to respond to all eMails sent to me.
I welcome all the help you can give and working together we can hope to make a difference.
Regards,
Niall